IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i9p3656-d353009.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodology for Gender Analysis in Transport: Factors with Influence in Women’s Inclusion as Professionals and Users of Transport Infrastructures

Author

Listed:
  • Elena García-Jiménez

    (AITEC Research & Innovation Projects, Parque Tecnológico C/Charles Robert Darwin 20, 46980 Valencia, Spain)

  • Sara Poveda-Reyes

    (AITEC Research & Innovation Projects, Parque Tecnológico C/Charles Robert Darwin 20, 46980 Valencia, Spain)

  • Gemma Dolores Molero

    (AITEC Research & Innovation Projects, Parque Tecnológico C/Charles Robert Darwin 20, 46980 Valencia, Spain)

  • Francisco Enrique Santarremigia

    (AITEC Research & Innovation Projects, Parque Tecnológico C/Charles Robert Darwin 20, 46980 Valencia, Spain)

  • Andrea Gorrini

    (Systematica Srl, via Lovanio 8, 20121 Milano, Italy)

  • Yvonne Hail

    (Management Work and Organisation, Management School, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK)

  • Augustus Ababio-Donkor

    (Transport Research Institute. Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh EH10 5DT, UK)

  • Maria Chiara Leva

    (School of food science and environmental Health, Technological University Dublin, Grangegorman lower, D07 H6K8 Dublin, Ireland)

  • Filomena Mauriello

    (Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 80125 Napoli, Italy)

Abstract

This work analyzes gendered processes by a methodology based on clustering factors with influence in the decision-making process of women as users or employees of the transport system. Considering gender as a social construction which changes over time and space, this study is based on the concept of a woman as a person who adopts this role in society. This paper performs a deep analysis of those factors women consider as needs and barriers to use or work in the transport system in four scenarios: railway public transport infrastructures, automated vehicles, bicycle sharing, and jobholders. A literature review and focus group discussions were performed under the consideration that the definition of woman includes the addition of several personal characteristics (age, sexual orientation, family responsibilities, and culture). The data analysis allowed the identification of fairness characteristics (FCs) that affect the interaction of women with the transport system for each scenario. A methodology for clustering the fairness characteristics identified the main areas of action to improve the inclusion of women within each use case. Further studies will be focused on the quantification and prioritization of the FCs through mathematical methods and the suggestion of inclusive measures by an interdisciplinary panel.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena García-Jiménez & Sara Poveda-Reyes & Gemma Dolores Molero & Francisco Enrique Santarremigia & Andrea Gorrini & Yvonne Hail & Augustus Ababio-Donkor & Maria Chiara Leva & Filomena Mauriello, 2020. "Methodology for Gender Analysis in Transport: Factors with Influence in Women’s Inclusion as Professionals and Users of Transport Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-32, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3656-:d:353009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3656/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3656/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille & Caruso, Geoffrey & Thomas, Isabelle, 2017. "Bicycle sharing system ‘success’ determinants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 202-214.
    2. Ronald W. McQuaid & Colin Lindsay, 2005. "The Concept of Employability," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(2), pages 197-219, February.
    3. Teresa Brell & Ralf Philipsen & Martina Ziefle, 2019. "sCARy! Risk Perceptions in Autonomous Driving: The Influence of Experience on Perceived Benefits and Barriers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 342-357, February.
    4. Pucher, John & Buehler, Ralph, 2006. "Why Canadians cycle more than Americans: A comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 265-279, May.
    5. Hohenberger, Christoph & Spörrle, Matthias & Welpe, Isabell M., 2016. "How and why do men and women differ in their willingness to use automated cars? The influence of emotions across different age groups," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 374-385.
    6. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Mazzei, Armando, 2014. "Barriers to bikesharing: an analysis from Melbourne and Brisbane," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 325-337.
    7. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Watson, Angela, 2015. "Factors influencing bike share membership: An analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 17-30.
    8. Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Sarbast Moslem & Thomas Blaschke & Szabolcs Duleba, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Julie Clark & Angela Curl, 2016. "Bicycle and Car Share Schemes as Inclusive Modes of Travel? A Socio-Spatial Analysis in Glasgow, UK," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 83-99.
    10. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    11. Faghih-Imani, Ahmadreza & Eluru, Naveen & El-Geneidy, Ahmed M. & Rabbat, Michael & Haq, Usama, 2014. "How land-use and urban form impact bicycle flows: evidence from the bicycle-sharing system (BIXI) in Montreal," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 306-314.
    12. Turnbull, Peter, 2013. "Promoting the employment women in the transport sector: obstacles and policy options," ILO Working Papers 994843393402676, International Labour Organization.
    13. Harvey, Joan & Thorpe, Neil & Caygill, Matthew & Namdeo, Anil, 2014. "Public attitudes to and perceptions of high speed rail in the UK," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 70-78.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sara Poveda-Reyes & Ashwani Kumar Malviya & Elena García-Jiménez & Gemma Dolores Molero & Maria Chiara Leva & Francisco Enrique Santarremigia, 2021. "Application of Mathematical and Computational Methods to Identify Women’s Priorities in Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-43, March.
    2. Yvonne Hail & Ronald McQuaid, 2021. "The Concept of Fairness in Relation to Women Transport Users," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Schaefer, Kerstin J. & Tuitjer, Leonie & Levin-Keitel, Meike, 2021. "Transport disrupted – Substituting public transport by bike or car under Covid 19," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 202-217.
    4. Andrea Gorrini & Rawad Choubassi & Federico Messa & Wafaa Saleh & Augustus Ababio-Donkor & Maria Chiara Leva & Lorraine D’Arcy & Francesco Fabbri & David Laniado & Pablo Aragón, 2021. "Unveiling Women’s Needs and Expectations as Users of Bike Sharing Services: The H2020 DIAMOND Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-29, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Gorrini & Rawad Choubassi & Federico Messa & Wafaa Saleh & Augustus Ababio-Donkor & Maria Chiara Leva & Lorraine D’Arcy & Francesco Fabbri & David Laniado & Pablo Aragón, 2021. "Unveiling Women’s Needs and Expectations as Users of Bike Sharing Services: The H2020 DIAMOND Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-29, May.
    2. Wang, Jueyu & Lindsey, Greg, 2019. "Do new bike share stations increase member use: A quasi-experimental study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-11.
    3. Maas, Suzanne & Attard, Maria & Caruana, Mark Anthony, 2020. "Assessing spatial and social dimensions of shared bicycle use in a Southern European island context: The case of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 81-97.
    4. Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "To be or not to be dockless: Empirical analysis of dockless bikeshare development in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 122-147.
    5. Mingyang Du & Lin Cheng, 2018. "Better Understanding the Characteristics and Influential Factors of Different Travel Patterns in Free-Floating Bike Sharing: Evidence from Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille & Caruso, Geoffrey & Thomas, Isabelle, 2017. "Bicycle sharing system ‘success’ determinants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 202-214.
    7. Böcker, Lars & Anderson, Ellinor & Uteng, Tanu Priya & Throndsen, Torstein, 2020. "Bike sharing use in conjunction to public transport: Exploring spatiotemporal, age and gender dimensions in Oslo, Norway," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 389-401.
    8. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille & Caruso, Geoffrey, 2015. "Estimating bike-share trips using station level data," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 260-279.
    9. Böcker, Lars & Anderson, Ellinor, 2020. "Interest-adoption discrepancies, mechanisms of mediation and socio-spatial inclusiveness in bike-sharing: The case of nine urban regions in Norway," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 266-277.
    10. Yuanyuan Zhang & Yuming Zhang, 2018. "Associations between Public Transit Usage and Bikesharing Behaviors in The United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Zhao, De & Ong, Ghim Ping & Wang, Wei & Hu, Xiao Jian, 2019. "Effect of built environment on shared bicycle reallocation: A case study on Nanjing, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 73-88.
    12. Radzimski, Adam & Dzięcielski, Michał, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between bike-sharing and public transport in Poznań, Poland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 189-202.
    13. Teixeira, João Filipe & Silva, Cecília & Moura e Sá, Frederico, 2023. "Factors influencing modal shift to bike sharing: Evidence from a travel survey conducted during COVID-19," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    14. Alexandros Nikitas, 2019. "How to Save Bike-Sharing: An Evidence-Based Survival Toolkit for Policy-Makers and Mobility Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, June.
    15. Tomasz Bieliński & Łukasz Dopierała & Maciej Tarkowski & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    16. An, Ran & Zahnow, Renee & Pojani, Dorina & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2019. "Weather and cycling in New York: The case of Citibike," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 97-112.
    17. Zhou, Xiaolu & Wang, Mingshu & Li, Dongying, 2019. "Bike-sharing or taxi? Modeling the choices of travel mode in Chicago using machine learning," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Yi Yao & Yifang Zhang & Lixin Tian & Nianxing Zhou & Zhilin Li & Minggang Wang, 2019. "Analysis of Network Structure of Urban Bike-Sharing System: A Case Study Based on Real-Time Data of a Public Bicycle System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    19. Dandan Xu & Yang Bian & Shinan Shu, 2020. "Research on the Psychological Model of Free-floating Bike-Sharing Using Behavior: A Case Study of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    20. Beairsto, Jeneva & Tian, Yufan & Zheng, Linyu & Zhao, Qunshan & Hong, Jinhyun, 2020. "Identifying locations for new bike-sharing stations in Glasgow: an analysis of spatial equity and demand factors," OSF Preprints apyfn, Center for Open Science.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3656-:d:353009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.